District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), was a landmark case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution protects an individual's right to possess a firearm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home and within federal enclaves. The decision did not address the question of whether the Second Amendment extends beyond federal enclaves to the states,[1] which was addressed later by McDonald v. Chicago (2010). It was the first Supreme Court case in United States history to decide whether the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms for self-defense.[2]

On June 26, 2008, the Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in Heller v. District of Columbia.[3][4] The Court of Appeals had struck down provisions of the Firearms Control Regulations Act of 1975 as unconstitutional, determined that handguns are "arms" for the purposes of the Second Amendment, found that the District of Columbia's regulations act was an unconstitutional banning, and struck down the portion of the regulations act that requires all firearms including rifles and shotguns be kept "unloaded and disassembled or bound by a trigger lock." "Prior to this decision the Firearms Control Regulation Act of 1975 also restricted residents from owning handguns except for those registered prior to 1975."[5]

McDonald v. Chicago, 561 US 3025 (2010), is a landmark[1] decision of the Supreme Court of the United States that determined whether the Second Amendment applies to the individual states. The Court held that the right of an individual to "keep and bear arms" protected by the Second Amendment is incorporated by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and applies to the states. The decision cleared up the uncertainty left in the wake of District of Columbia v. Heller as to the scope of gun rights in regard to the states.

Initially the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit had upheld a Chicago ordinance banning the possession of handguns as well as other gun regulations affecting rifles and shotguns, citing United States v. Cruikshank, Presser v. Illinois, and Miller v. Texas.[2] The petition for certiorari was filed by Alan Gura, the attorney who had successfully argued Heller, and Chicago-area attorney David G. Sigale.[3] The Second Amendment Foundation and the Illinois State Rifle Association sponsored the litigation on behalf of several Chicago residents, including retiree Otis McDonald.

Well, I've seen many "patriots" want to start a civil war; sorry but the "patriots" made their own problem with the rhetoric they give

Quoting: Anonymous Coward 25621584

Rhetoric? Really?

You fucking libtard you!!

It's not Rhetoric if the liberals are REALLY trying to infringe on our 2nd amendment rights.

Just because you want to live in Libtardistan doesnt mean the rest of the law-abiding citizens who happen to enjoy their 2nd amendment freedoms have to placiate your ass by allowing you to infringe on our rights!

In other words, go fuck yourself!

Quoting: Sledster

So it's all about killing "liberals," and blowing them up. See that's why you are a terrorist

Well, I've seen many "patriots" want to start a civil war; sorry but the "patriots" made their own problem with the rhetoric they give

Quoting: Anonymous Coward 25621584

Rhetoric? Really?

You fucking libtard you!!

It's not Rhetoric if the liberals are REALLY trying to infringe on our 2nd amendment rights.

Just because you want to live in Libtardistan doesnt mean the rest of the law-abiding citizens who happen to enjoy their 2nd amendment freedoms have to placiate your ass by allowing you to infringe on our rights!

In other words, go fuck yourself!

Quoting: Sledster

So it's all about killing "liberals," and blowing them up. See that's why you are a terrorist

Quoting: Anonymous Coward 25621584

No,and where did you get that idea? Where was that stated?

The real terrorists are your sort of people except that your sort won't put themselves at risk. You and people like you want to use state terror to destroy human rights.

On Thursday, the Ohio National Guard 52nd Civil Support Unit descended upon the sleepy berg of Portsmouth to run a mock disaster drill. In this case, they practiced their response to the potential release of a chemical, biological or radiological weapon.

The exercise was overseen by the Ohio Emergency Management Agency. In addition to the National Guard, local police and fire departments were also involved.

While such terror drills have become somewhat commonplace since the 9/11 attacks, this one included a telling and rather frightening twist...

WSAZ reported: "The make-believe scenario is timely. Two school employees who are disgruntled over the government's interpretation of the Second Amendment, plot to use chemical, biological and radiological agents against members of the local community."

Angry yet?

No?

Then see what this public official had to say...

Portsmouth Fire Chief Bill Raison told the Portsmouth Daily Times:

"I think sometimes we tend to think of terrorism as just international terrorism. What's the likelihood that's coming to Portsmouth, Ohio? Most people think it's not very likely. But we forget that there's a lot of domestic terrorism. There's organizations and things that go on within the United States that can be every bit as devastating as the international terrorism is."

"And I sincerely believe, with you, that banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies; and that the principle of spending money to be paid by posterity, under the name of funding, is but swindling futurity on a large scale." - Thomas Jefferson, from a Letter to John Taylor written in 1816

"Unfortunately, it is in the nature of man to tinker - even with immutable truth. Thus, we must be ever vigilant... - James Munford

“It is a sad fate for a man to die too well known to everybody else, and still unknown to himself.” - Francis Bacon

"Better the illusions that exalt us than ten thousand truths" - Aleksander Pushkin*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~I do not give negative Karma. I believe that all opinions are worthy of debate and discussion. Free speech is essential to the growth and advancement of each individual and all of Humankind.

We all knew the terror designation was coming sooner or later, was just a matter of when it'd start popping up.

Feed the hungry, visit the sick, free a captive if he be unjustly confined(kidnapped/enslaved by someone). Assist any person oppressed, whether they're of the Muslim or non-Muslim. - Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wasallam)

It does look like a drill/exercise. I'm curious about the November 2012 date? Location?

Quoting: Pale Horse

As I recall, the principal of Sandy Hook Elementary (now deceased) posted several drill photographs to her Facebook page. This photo is not up there now, but it was before, or so I read.... somewhere....

i remember in 2002 when my friend tried to tell me that 911 was an inside job...i laughed in his face.

then in 2007...while surfing youtube..up pops WTC 7...so i watched it. I watched it again. i watched EVERY video available on WTC 7 and all the 911 videos...for about 14 hrs straight.

then , I cried. I shed tears maybe once every 10 yrs...but this one killed me. I realized that the U.S. had been taken over by tyrannical forces. ...

I am surprised that the U.S. has not had another false flag since then...at least any of real import. I don't bother to get involved in studying the recent shootings...it really doesn't matter one way or the other whether they are false flag...

it's all an agenda to take down the last bastian of freedom in the world...the U.S.A. ...and apparently ...timing is everything for tptb.

the next false flag will likely be either a nuke, a pandemic, or some trigger event to start a civil war...not a revolution. The govt will remain the good guys when they come in and give food to the masses in the crisis.

O.K. thanks 13th. Last night there wasn't anything good on TV, so I put the Military Channel on and was reading here on GLP. They were talking about inaugurations/ss and all that goes in to them security-wise.

I clearly heard them say right wing extremists. I thought that was odd. So I hit the info button on the remote to see what year the show was made (2012).

I live in the WSAZ footprint and about 30 minutes up river from Portsmouth. This makes me VERY angry. My state government is about to hear from me on this one. Nobody can intimidate me like this.

Quoting: Obiwanbeeohbee

I can't imagine the thought process that would consider a second amendment supporter to be a "terrorist". Sick.

Quoting: s. d. butler

Meh. The 'second amendment supporter' dialogue on most sites, including this one, tends to be in the neighborhood of 'rawr, I'll show the government what's what if they mess with the second amendment, rawr I'll shoot the gubmint when they come for mah gunzzzzzz, rawr it's time for a second revolution, rawr it's time for civil war with the gubmint'

It's pretty reasonable for them to prepare for the contingency that some of those NRA nutbags might actually have the stones to put their money where their mouth is.

I mean, the fact that they prep for Muslim terrorist attacks doesn't mean they view all Muslims as terrorists. So why does them prepping for domestic terrorism from gun nuts immediately make you think they look at all gun nuts as terrorists?

I live in the WSAZ footprint and about 30 minutes up river from Portsmouth. This makes me VERY angry. My state government is about to hear from me on this one. Nobody can intimidate me like this.

Quoting: Obiwanbeeohbee

I can't imagine the thought process that would consider a second amendment supporter to be a "terrorist". Sick.

Quoting: s. d. butler

Meh. The 'second amendment supporter' dialogue on most sites, including this one, tends to be in the neighborhood of 'rawr, I'll show the government what's what if they mess with the second amendment, rawr I'll shoot the gubmint when they come for mah gunzzzzzz, rawr it's time for a second revolution, rawr it's time for civil war with the gubmint'

It's pretty reasonable for them to prepare for the contingency that some of those NRA nutbags might actually have the stones to put their money where their mouth is.

I mean, the fact that they prep for Muslim terrorist attacks doesn't mean they view all Muslims as terrorists. So why does them prepping for domestic terrorism from gun nuts immediately make you think they look at all gun nuts as terrorists?